Dr. Helen chastens an errant woman

After laying the smack down, with the assistance of more than a few disenchanted men, Kay Hymowitz begins to realize that perhaps she didn’t look at the whole situation:

“Given the hundreds of messages I’ve gotten from men concerning my recent City Journal article, I wasn’t surprised to see your post. And I have to say, while I stand by my description of the child man culture and still believe that young women’s complaints about the guys out there are based on some truth, I made a mistake in not exploring the male view.

At any rate, my next piece will be about exactly that. (Your comments section will probably help me.) I knew some men were angry, but I didn’t understand the depth and extent of their rage. I don’t think many people do.

Best regards;
A Chastened Kay Hymowitz ”

I’m happy being married to Spacebunny, but you couldn’t pay me to be married to anyone else, especially not under the current legal system. With sharia already on its way in, America probably has less than twenty years to abandon equalitarianism before its demographic fate is cast. (It’s probably already sunk economically, but that’s a different matter.) Needless to say, unless Hillary overplays her hand to a degree I can’t imagine, this simply isn’t going to happen.

Adios, Captain Underoos

It was a stupid idea from the start. I’m only surprised that he lasted this long.

Christian leadership

Contrast this defeatist Anglican leadership with the leadership of African bishop Peter Akinola, who I mentioned in TIA:

The Archbishop of Canterbury says the adoption of certain aspects of Sharia law in the UK “seems unavoidable”. Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4’s World at One that the UK has to “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.

What a joke. What a ridiculous and pathetic joke. I find it amazing that anyone still wants to argue that the post-Christian era is going to be anything but a disaster for European civilization. Meanwhile, the Enlightened fools are throwing their energy into battling the only force that can stop the decline.

The truth stings

“There is something about soccer players that is very sexy.
– Marisa Miller

I read the quote. I thought of Nate. And then I laughed.

Who is the lesser evil?

John McCain or Hillary Rodham-Clinton? Superficially, the answer should be simple. It’s the most frighteningly soulless individual on the planet, the Lizard Queen. Stare into her dead, unblinking eyes and shudder. However, this doesn’t necessarily mean that Hillary is likely to be more damaging to the country for two reasons.

1. The superficial comparison does not account for the Nixon-to-China phenomenon. As the mindless support of George Bush on the part of conservatives showed, it’s always easier for someone who is nominally right to move left, and vice-versa. Consider the contrast between Somalia and Serbia and Iraq. The level of national interest was similarly low in all three cases, but it is indisputable that a Wilsonian war for the expansion of democracy was far more popular among Republicans when initiated by a Republican president than it was when initiated by a Democratic one. When Hillary moves left, there will be resistance from the conservative commentariat. When McCain moves left, there will only be excuses made for him by the same conservatives who mindlessly defended George Bush.

2. Hillary is worse on the broad spectrum of political issues. But on the three of the four issues most dangerous to American liberties and the state of the nation, McCain is worse. He’s worse on immigration, he’s worse on the freedom of speech and he’s worse on the various wars and occupations. Only on the right to bear arms is he arguably better, but for all her intrinsic leftism, Hillary hasn’t shown herself to be an enthusiastic gun-grabber.

So, who is the lesser of these two definite evils? I won’t support either, because I think it is, well, evil, to knowingly line up behind evil, but it’s an interesting case to consider. I don’t include Obama, because as I’ve insisted from the start, the Magic Negro is only in the mix to keep Democrats entertained for the first half of the Lizard Queen’s coronation march.

When props are due

CrazyIvan points out that atheists and Christians can reach common ground:

” And Vox, how about some Kudos to me for supporting your boy Ron Paul. It’s nice to agree on something isn’t it.”

As I have said many times before, I would support an atheist libertarian – a real libertarian, not a Bill Maher “I have have no idea what that means but I think it sounds cool so I’ll call myself one” libertarian – before I would support yet another Christian charlatan like George Bush the Elder, Bill Clinton, George Bush the Younger, Mike Huckabee or anyone else wrapping their hunger for power over others in their purported Christian faith.

However, I must also ask CrazyIvan what in the name of liberty he is doing as a libertarian in trying to defend Sam Harris, who does not believe in freedom of belief, does not believe in free will, opposes national sovereignty and is both a defender of torture and an advocate of one-world government? It seems to me that CrazyIvan has far more ideologically in common with the libertarian theists than he does with the utopian atheists, his lack of religious faith notwithstanding.

And while we’re on the subject, I should note that I have written a response to the recent Amazon reviewer who claims that Harris supports freedom of belief and asserts that he is not just another lethal utopian calling for an imposed global dictatorship.